Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Sorry I didn’t think to come and update this.    So the outcome was that he went to court. Apparently the judge told the landlord off for not sending a letter before action but did nothing about it. He didn’t accept all the damages the landlord claimed, and told him off for accusing my friend of deliberately and maliciously damaging anything, and he awarded him small amounts of the damages he claimed for. The landlord had also made an awful lot of things up that never existed and accused my friend of stealing them, and the judge didn’t accept any of those claims.   However, I’m back asking advice now. So he made an offer of payment via the court forms, sometime before Christmas and straight after the hearing. The landlord didn’t reply so the court accepted the payments.  My friend has been paying the £10 a month each month. Then a couple of days ago he had received a letter from court with a hearing date in a couple of weeks, and a very irate letter from the landlord saying that my friend has consistently lied and that nothing he says should be believed, and that he wants the bailiffs to be called on him and that he absolutely refuses the payment plan. The letter is marked as received by the courts in December and this is the first that’s been sent since then. My friend and his wife are now panicked, what does this mean? And can they now get bailiffs sent round? He earns an ok wage, which somehow the landlord has referred to in his letter, but he equally has a lot of expenditure and can’t afford to pay any more. What will happen at this hearing and can they send out the bailiffs just because the landlord wants them to?    I have no clue what to advise him, can you help at all please?
    • Thanks Bank – I took your cynicism / experience on board and responded thus: Thank you for your response Mr Schnur  I set out my position quite clearly in my letter of claim and nothing has changed. Your insurance requirement is unlawful and is contrary to section 57 of the Consumer Rights Act, and also section 72 of the same statute. I would also refer you to the outcomes in PENCHEV v P2G (225MC852) and SMIRNOVS v P2G (27MC729).  My deadline for action - 1 May 2024 - still stands.
    • The other thing is that you are making a big mistake imagining that they are at all concerned about wasting court costs et cetera. They are only concerned about being obstructive and discouraging others.  
    • I have dad's last will from 2019 which mentions the trust. I am in the process of going through probate as the only thing that needs probate is a couple of shares he has (under £3000).  Speaking to my brother and my dad's wife they wouldn't mind going with another solicitor if we need to pay extra for the trust.   
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like
  • Recommended Topics

Bromley County Court 24-Aug-07 Hearing


Noddy73
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6081 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 98
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

sky, take deep breaths girl.............. chill.......we are here to help you and if you are going to court on your own you coudl post and see if there is someone near you that coudl go with you for mornal support. jsut a thought:):)

 

keep phoning the court every day and asking

rockin all over the world

Link to post
Share on other sites

hi

 

thanks for that i have sent a letter ot abbey/bank on saturday it is on judgement by dafault lula thread two if that makes senses and she told me to send if had not heard anything.

and dont worry i am not alone my husband is with me well actually it is a joint account and i put the court case in his name ha ha

Link to post
Share on other sites

Called them this morning and judgement by default not logged although it was sent a week and a half ago and it may not be logged for 10 days! Pointed out that hearing was in 3 days and she said there wasn't really anything they could do and that it wouldn't affect the hearing if I didn't get judgement. I said that it would affect the hearing if I did get judgement before then - I'm getting sick of being on hold for 40 mins every time I phone them and then being no better off for info that I was beforehand.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sent my letter on the same day and have been faxing it across every 3 days. After complaining today, was told the Court Manager will try and find it and call me back. I am not holding my breath though.

 

What you ladies bring to the court

* Removal of Stay

* Bundle

* Originals

Link to post
Share on other sites

unfortunatelyt this si the problem with just aleeter askign for the stay removal........... I tried to have the defence stuck out just by writing to the judge.............. it was jsut added ot the file.....

 

which is why I am saying please please file a N244. they cannot ignore that........... you willget a hearing

rockin all over the world

Link to post
Share on other sites

Agreed Noddy , but ti is vital that the correct form is used...................... if oyu have the ground sto use a N227 then use it............... if you do not then it could seriously hamper your case if incorrectly used.........

rockin all over the world

Link to post
Share on other sites

AGE. I disagree. In the several small claims I have done in the past, the Judge is very understanding. This is the small claims not the high court and they are more understanding and look at what you were trying to achieve.

 

But if I am wrong, I am wrong and only human. Anyway the hearing is this Friday so will let you know after that.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You may be correct Noddy, but thigns have changed dramatically since the OFT announcement in July, and what took place prior may very well not be the case now!!!!

 

The judges are getting fed up with us taking up their valuable time and coudl VERY possibly start being VERY strict..............

 

surely it is much better to send in the correct and appropriate form to the individual case requirements, than risk using a N244 when it shoudl have been a N227 or the other way around........]

 

lets face it, it is only a matter of time before the courts do start impliminting stringent rules.... in order to cut down on the increasing volume........

 

They thought we woudl og away, we havent and we arent........they will need to find alternative ways of plugging the dam!!!!!

 

My only concern is that ppl do not given the courts ANY REASON TO toss the claim back or out..................

 

hence why the correct form is vital, but as I have said it is only my view, nothing more........

rockin all over the world

Link to post
Share on other sites

Dear Sir/Madam

 

 

I write in relation to the matters as detailed above, and specifically the order in proceedings made by A Proper Officer on 15/05/07.

Since you wrote to the defendant with regards to the claim as detailed above, they have to date, made no attempt whatsoever to engage in dialogue, and all of our letters to them over the past 4 months have not even been afforded the courtesy of an acknowledgement.

We are aware that to date the banks have failed to defend a case in the courts and that they often use the court process to extend and delay the period of time within which they deal with these matters satisfactorily. We first contacted HSBC in January 2007 and it is now July 2007 and feel that 7months is more than a reasonable length of time and as such accordingly, I hope the court will be minded to consider the following case management proposals, and respectfully request that an order may be made as follows

  • That the Defence is struck out as an abuse of process, pursuant to rule 3.4(2)(b) of the Civil Procedure Rules.
     
    On the basis that the Defendant has filed a template defence then subsequently settled each and every other claim of this nature.
     
    Since May 2006, I am aware of over 100 claims of this nature in which the Defendant has filed an acknowledgement of service, then a Defence, then an allocation questionnaire, then has breached the order for pre-hearing directions, then has finally settled without liability shortly in advance of the hearing or trial. A sample list of these claims, including their claim numbers, is attached (attachment 1B).

It is submitted that the defendant’s litigation strategy is flagrantly abusive of the public resource, and further, contrary to almost all of the Overriding Objective’s of the Civil Procedure Rules. It is respectfully submitted that the Defendant will continue to conduct litigation in this manner for as long as it is allowed to do so with impunity.

Please find attached a copy of an order made by Lincoln County court, in at least 6 cases similar to my own, in which Abbey Plc were the Defendant's. The court considered the authority of Mullen-v-Hackney London Borough Council (1997)2 A11ER 906 to be relevant. If this honourable court also considers this authority relevant, I would respectfully request that the court applies its special knowledge of the defendant’s notorious and well established conduct in similar cases when considering order in the present case. Please find attached the case to which I refer

I would aver that if the Defendant has the serious intention of defending this claim at trial, as is indicated by its defence, then it is incumbent upon it to disclose such information. Further, the proposed directions are now routinely ordered in claims of this nature.

We ask the court to award judgement in our favour given the exhaustive lengths we have gone to in order to resolve this issue without the courts involvement and the defendant’s blatant refusal to adhere with the court order of the 15th May 2007.

We ask this matter be treated with urgency as the court date is the 7th August 2007 as we have until the 2nd August 2007 to make any representations to the Court we may wish to be considered in the Preliminary hearing, obviously if the judgement was awarded in our favour there would be no requirement for this.

We thank the court for your assistance in this matter and should you require to contact us by telephone the numbers are xxxxxxxx and xxxxxxxxx

rockin all over the world

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...